Next Article in Journal
Living with the River: The Role of Bridges in Shaping Valencia’s Urban Form Until 1957
Previous Article in Journal
Recognition of Commons and ICCAs—Territories of Life in Europe: Assessing Twelve Years of Initiatives in Spain
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Land
Volume 14
Issue 8
10.3390/land14081624
land-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Construction of Production-Living-Ecological Space Pattern Languages for Traditional Villages in Enshi Prefecture Based on Spatial Distribution Characteristics

by
Yawei Zhang
1,2,
Teng Cai
1,
Zhiying Liu
3 and
Yang Shu
1,2,*
1
School of Urban Design, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430072, China
2
Hubei Engineering Technology Research Center for Human Settlements, Wuhan 430072, China
3
School of Architecture and Planning, Hunan University, Changsha 410082, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Land 2025, 14(8), 1624; https://doi.org/10.3390/land14081624
Submission received: 19 June 2025 / Revised: 26 July 2025 / Accepted: 7 August 2025 / Published: 11 August 2025
(This article belongs to the Section Land Planning and Landscape Architecture)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

To explore new methods for the conservation and utilization of traditional villages, a research path of “spatial distribution analysis–traditional village classification–pattern language identification” was constructed. First, the spatial distribution characteristics of traditional villages in Enshi Prefecture were analyzed. Then, the factors influencing the distribution characteristics were explored, and traditional village types were classified. Finally, the Production-Living-Ecological space pattern languages (PLES-PLs) of traditional villages were identified. The results show the following: (1) Traditional villages in Enshi Prefecture exhibit a clustered distribution at the macro level, mainly concentrated in the central and southwestern regions, but the distribution is unbalanced across counties and cities. (2) Five Production-Living-Ecological space pattern languages were identified, namely Nested Pattern, Ring-Shaped Pattern, Guided Pattern, Juxtaposed Pattern, Semi-Enclosed Pattern.

1. Introduction

Traditional villages, as representations of agricultural culture and valuable cultural heritage, hold significant historical, cultural, scientific, artistic, economic, and social value [1,2]. Compared to general villages, they feature a wealth of ancient architecture and folk traditions, embodying the wisdom of human interaction with the natural environment [3]. Research on the spatial typology of traditional villages not only provides a foundation for understanding their formation and development but also helps clarify key stages in their evolution. This has led to extensive academic discourse, spanning from theoretical frameworks to specific dimensions. The theoretical foundation for spatial classification is rooted in Halfacree’s “three-fold model of rural space,” which decomposes rural space into three elements: rural locality, rural representation, and rural everyday life. This model offers an analytical framework for understanding the complexity of rural material, cultural, and social spaces [4]. The “Production-Living-Ecological Space (PLES)”—comprising production space, living space, and ecological space—serves as a core element of traditional village values. The organizational relationships and structural rules within this model reflect the local wisdom embedded in the construction of these spaces, positioning it as a critical lens for contemporary research. The academic contributions in the study of the PLES are diverse. For example, in production space, Wilson contrasts “productivist” and “post-productivist” rural spaces, providing a deeper understanding of the evolution of rural production functions [5]. Galani-Moutafi (2013), using the Aegean Islands as a case study, shows how rural spaces achieve reproduction through interactions among agricultural practices, cultural performances, and development visions, forming dynamic production systems that are deeply embedded in local ecology [6]. Mackrell and Pemberton (2018) focus on the labor practices of Eastern European migrants in rural England, revealing how their labor reconfigured local production spaces, while also shedding light on underlying issues of poverty and deprivation often overlooked in mainstream narratives [7]. Research on living spaces emphasizes the relationship between social interaction and spatial structure. Bański J and Wesołowska M argue that the unchecked expansion of rural housing leads to conflicts between agricultural land and residential spaces, which alters the traditional layout of villages, impacting the landscape and structure of living spaces [8]. Reid and Green (2025), on a more positive note, propose that rural teacher education programs can regenerate living spaces by fostering community interaction and social cohesion [9]. In the domain of ecological space, Elbakidze et al. have identified land cover types that provide green infrastructure (GI) functions in rural environments, offering a variety of ecosystem services (ES) that are essential for the well-being of rural populations [10]. It is important to recognize that the organization and composition of the PLES in traditional villages are deeply influenced by geographical location. Due to variations in natural conditions and cultural backgrounds, traditional villages in different regions exhibit diverse spatial patterns. These villages show significant differentiation in core characteristics, such as ancestral settlement [11,12], natural integration [13,14], and agricultural production [15,16], highlighting the regional adaptability of the PLES model. Therefore, understanding the regional differentiation of PLES provides valuable insights into the organizational logic of traditional villages, allowing us to better grasp the underlying principles of village construction and offering a solid theoretical foundation for regional protection practices.
Building on research into the spatial typology of traditional villages, further classification of villages based on spatial distribution characteristics is essential. Existing studies on the spatial distribution of traditional villages have primarily focused on two areas: factors influencing distribution and spatial analysis methods. The former includes factors like altitude, terrain, proximity to water, water systems, economic development, and historical culture [17,18], while the latter encompasses methods such as nearest neighbor indices, kernel density analysis, and concentration indices [19,20]. These studies provide useful support for the classification of traditional village types. While current research on the PLES model primarily focuses on distribution features [21,22], morphological traits [23,24], evolutionary patterns [25,26], and protection strategies [27,28], much of the work has concentrated on individual village morphology. There is a gap in the comprehensive analysis of spatial patterns from a regional perspective [29]. Therefore, there is an urgent need to extract spatial typologies of the PLES and develop sustainable protection and utilization strategies within the framework of traditional village classification.
To address this gap, the theory of pattern language, proposed by architect Christopher Alexander in the 1970s, can serve as an analytical tool [30]. Pattern language is a methodology used to study and extract universal patterns and structures within a system, allowing for the localization of expressions based on universal principles [31]. The core logic is to describe and analyze buildings and urban spaces through design patterns, which help designers address spatial problems systematically. For example, in architecture, a pattern might focus on “how to optimize lighting through spatial layout” or “how to design public areas to facilitate social interaction [32].” When multiple patterns are combined, they form a new pattern. This framework can be applied to the study of traditional villages’ PLES, where production space, living space, and ecological space serve as independent patterns, and their complementary relationships form the overarching PLES pattern language [33]. By extracting the PLES pattern language inherent in traditional villages and analyzing the internal relationships and adaptive logic between production, living, and ecological spaces, we can provide a set of spatial guidelines for the protection, repair, and revitalization of similar traditional villages. Although the relationship between traditional village formation and the PLES model has been acknowledged in academic circles, much of the research remains at a descriptive level. There is a need for deeper analysis of the mechanisms behind this relationship, as well as a universal theoretical framework that explains the composition patterns of PLES. This study aims to fill this gap by extracting the PLES pattern language based on the classification and feature extraction of traditional village types. This research will follow a path of spatial distribution characteristics–traditional village type classification–pattern language identification [34,35,36], using traditional villages in Enshi Prefecture as the case study. By exploring their distribution characteristics and influencing factors, the study will classify traditional villages and identify the PLES pattern language for different types. Ultimately, this research will clarify the value of the PLES morphology and provide insights for the protection, utilization, and sustainable development of traditional villages.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Research Area

Enshi Prefecture, located in the southwestern part of Hubei Province, lies at the junction of Hubei, Hunan, and Chongqing. It borders Qianjiang District of Chongqing to the west, Wanzhou District of Chongqing to the north, Xiangxi Prefecture of Hunan Province to the south, and Shennongjia and Yichang to the east. Enshi covers an area of 24,000 square kilometers and is home to the largest number of traditional villages in Hubei Province. The terrain is predominantly mountainous, encompassing sections of the Yangtze River Three Gorges, the Qingjiang River Basin, as well as parts of the Wushan and Wuling Mountains. The overall topography features higher altitude in the northwest and lower altitude in the southeast, with substantial vertical disparities due to considerable variations in altitude (Figure 1). As of March 2023, Hubei Province has 270 national-level traditional villages, among which 92 are located in Enshi Prefecture. These villages were included in the six batches of national traditional villages announced by the Ministry of Housing and Urban–Rural Development, the Ministry of Culture and Tourism, the National Cultural Heritage Administration, and the Ministry of Finance. This study focuses on the spatial distribution of the 92 traditional villages in Enshi Prefecture, categorizing them into different types. Ten representative traditional villages of each type were selected for a detailed study on the PLES.

2.2. Data Sources

The data for the 92 traditional villages used in this study was sourced from geographic coordinate information obtained via the Baidu Maps API. The center points of areas with concentrated village buildings were selected as coordinate collection points, ensuring the accuracy of the spatial location identification for each village. Based on the latitude and longitude data, vector analysis was performed using ArcGIS 10.7 software to generate a spatial distribution map of traditional villages in Hubei Province.
The DEM data, administrative boundaries, water systems, and road data were all obtained from the 2021 version of the 1:1,000,000 Public Edition Basic Geographic Information dataset provided by the National Geographic Information Resource Directory Service System. This dataset has an accuracy of approximately 1000 m. Due to the fragmented nature of the local terrain and the potential biases from data resampling and interpolation algorithms, there may be minor errors in the slope and aspect data, though these errors remain within reasonable bounds.
Ethnic settlement data and regional economic development statistics for each city and county were sourced from the 2023 Enshi Prefecture Statistical Yearbook. The overall layout plans for each traditional village were manually drawn based on village images extracted from relevant mapping software, combined with field survey data.

2.3. Research Methods

At the prefectural level of Enshi, we analyzed the spatial distribution characteristics of traditional villages using methods such as Thiessen polygons, kernel density analysis, and the imbalance index. The objective was to identify the natural and human factors that influence the spatial arrangement of these villages and to reveal the regional distribution patterns of traditional villages in Enshi Prefecture.
Building on these regional characteristics, we selected representative villages for in-depth analysis of their PLES elements and the interrelationships among these components. We examined the specific spatial layouts and structural configurations of various types of traditional villages, uncovering the underlying logical relationships and deep structures of their PLES. This allowed us to develop spatial pattern languages for each village type.
Finally, we explored the interactions between each village and its surrounding environment, as well as the balance among the living, production, and ecological aspects within the villages, as reflected in their respective spatial patterns. This research followed a pathway of “spatial distribution analysis–traditional village classification–pattern language identification,” providing valuable insights for the protection and sustainable use of traditional villages (Figure 2).

3. Results

3.1. Overall Distribution Characteristics

In analyzing the distribution characteristics of traditional villages, we treat them as point-based elements to explore their spatial distribution types and levels of aggregation. The spatial distribution of these villages can generally be categorized into three types: clustered, random, and uniform. The coefficient of variation (CV) calculated for the Thiessen polygons is 1.15, which exceeds 0.64, indicating a clustered distribution pattern for the traditional villages in Enshi Prefecture at the macro level.
Kernel density (Figure 3) analysis further reveals that traditional villages in Enshi Prefecture are predominantly concentrated in the central and southwestern regions, forming four major clusters: the northern part of Laifeng County, the western part of Xuan’en County, the southeastern part of Enshi City, and the central part of Lichuan City. Together, these four counties and cities host 68 traditional villages, which account for 74% of the total number of traditional villages in Enshi Prefecture. Additionally, an imbalance index calculation yields a value of 0.81, indicating significant disparities in the distribution of traditional villages across different counties and cities within the prefecture.

3.2. Influencing Factors of Distribution

3.2.1. Altitude

The topographic distribution map of Enshi City (Figure 4a) reveals that the western regions of Enshi City, Xianfeng County, Laifeng County, and Xuan’en County are relatively low in altitude. The overall terrain features higher altitude in the east and west, with lower altitude in the central and southern areas. Given the unique mountainous landscape and significant altitude variations across Enshi Prefecture, the altitude is categorized into three levels: high, medium, and low, using 600 m and 1000 m as thresholds. Specifically, villages located at altitudes above 1000 m are classified as high-altitude villages, with 29 in total; those situated between 600 m and 1000 m are medium-altitude villages, totaling 52; and those at altitudes below 600 m are low-altitude villages, with 11 in total. Villages at medium and high altitudes together account for the majority, comprising 88% of the total.

3.2.2. Proximity to Water

Through nearest-neighbor analysis of the traditional villages in relation to water systems (Figure 4b), it was found that the average distance from the villages to water systems is 1.71 km. By establishing buffer zones of 1.5 km and 3 km around the water systems, the analysis revealed that 49 traditional villages are located within 1.5 km of water systems, and 75 are within 3 km, accounting for 81.5% of the total number of villages. This indicates that most traditional villages are situated relatively close to water systems. When using the 3 km boundary to assess proximity to water, the traditional villages can be clearly divided into two categories: hydrophilic and hydrophobic. The majority of the traditional villages fall into the hydrophilic category.

3.2.3. Slope

An analysis of the overall slope in Enshi Prefecture (Figure 4c) reveals that areas with a slope below 10° account for 21.6% of the total area, while those with a slope above 30° account for 18.2%, indicating that the terrain in Enshi Prefecture is generally steep, with considerable fluctuations in altitude. By using 10° as the boundary, a more detailed examination of the slopes of individual traditional villages shows that 21 villages have slopes below 10°, and 16 villages have slopes above 30°. The majority of the villages, totaling 58, are situated in the 10° to 30° range, accounting for 63% of all traditional villages.

3.2.4. Aspect

Through statistical analysis of the aspects (Figure 4d), it is found that 34 traditional villages face south and northwest, while only 7 face north. In total, 65 traditional villages are oriented towards the southeast, south, southwest, west, or northwest, accounting for 71.1% of the total. This suggests that the predominant orientations of traditional villages are to the west and south.

3.3. Type Classification and Sample Village Extraction

Based on an analysis of the factors influencing the distribution of traditional villages, four typical characteristic types of traditional villages in Enshi Prefecture have been identified. These include villages located at mid-to-high altitudes above 600 m, hydrophilic villages within a 3 km proximity to water, gently sloping villages with slopes ranging from 10° to 30° that are suitable for agricultural production, and sunny-facing villages with predominant orientations towards the west and south, which receive abundant sunlight. Traditional villages have been classified according to these distinctive characteristics (Table 1). These types are closely linked to the natural environment of the villages and reflect the typical features of traditional villages in Enshi, providing a crucial foundation for the subsequent identification of the PLES-PLs.
Considering the representativeness of the spatial layout, the recognizability of the layout, and the integrity of spatial elements, 10 traditional villages, each representing a different type of classification, were selected for in-depth study (Table 2). The selection of these villages also took into account data integrity and prior field research: the selected villages all have clear satellite imagery data available, providing a solid data foundation for the study. Additionally, all of them have been visited in the field to ensure the authenticity and accuracy of the spatial information.
By analyzing the satellite images and field survey data of these villages, the elements of the PLES and their combinatorial patterns were extracted. Based on this, the unique PLES pattern languages (PLES-PLs) for each traditional village were developed. Drawing on the research and analysis from the earlier stages, the maps of the ten sample villages were created using satellite imagery (Figure 5).

3.4. Identification of Production-Living-Ecological Spatial Pattern Languages

In traditional villages, productive land primarily consists of arable land and orchards, which are utilized for crop cultivation and horticultural production. Ecological land includes various types such as forests, grasslands, wetlands, and terrestrial water bodies. These areas are essential for maintaining the ecological balance of traditional villages, protecting biodiversity and providing critical ecosystem services. Living land encompasses rural infrastructure such as construction land, residential areas, and transportation networks, providing essential living space and infrastructure for rural residents. Together, these elements form the foundation of the living and transportation systems of the village. The harmonious coexistence of these three types of land—productive, ecological, and living—constitutes the unique land use pattern and functional system of traditional villages.
The organizational relationships of the elements in the PLES-PLs include spatial relationships, proportional relationships, and organizational relationships among the elements (Figure 6). Spatial relationships are analyzed both in planar and sectional dimensions, providing a comprehensive understanding of the interdependence and mutual influence among the elements. Proportional relationships, such as the ratio of living space to productive space, serve as an important indicator for measuring the agricultural value of traditional villages, reflecting the villages’ industrial structure and overall land use. Organizational relationships are specifically reflected in forms such as adjacency to mountains and rivers or being surrounded by mountains and forests, which visually demonstrate the organizational strategies employed in the PLES-PLs.
Based on spatial relationships, spatial organization, and spatial composition differences across various types of traditional villages, five distinct PLES-PLs have been identified, which can be grouped into similar spatial structures. These are the Nested Pattern, Ring-Shaped Pattern, Guided Pattern, Juxtaposed Pattern, and Semi-Enclosed Pattern. These patterns exhibit significant differences in terms of topographical features, layout forms, and types of productive activities (Figure 7).

3.4.1. Nested Pattern

The core feature of the Nested Pattern is the hierarchical interlacing of productive and living spaces, which organically interpenetrate to form a spatial composite where “you are in me, and I am in you.” This pattern is exemplified by Damaopo Ying Village and Dashuijing Village, both of which are mid-to-high altitude, multi-ethnic settlements. The spatial characteristics are as follows:
The villages are arranged in a stepped layout along the mountainside, forming a terraced shape that adapts to the natural topography. This layout not only optimizes the limited land resources but also addresses the construction challenges posed by the terrain, reducing both technical and economic costs. The overall arrangement is backed by the mountain, fully utilizing the slope to achieve a harmonious coexistence of living, productive, and ecological spaces, perfectly fitting the natural conditions and minimizing excessive land development. Villagers rely on mountain farming and forestry resources (such as terraced farming and forest gathering) to sustain their livelihoods, with local forest resources also serving as construction materials.

3.4.2. Ring-Shaped Pattern

The core feature of the Ring-Shaped Pattern is the concentric arrangement of functional areas around a central core, with productive, living, and ecological spaces distributed in a radial pattern based on their functional relationships, forming a hierarchical center-edge structure. This pattern is represented by Shemi Lake Village and Zhang Gaozhai Village, both of which are flatland settlements of the Tujia and Miao ethnic groups. The spatial characteristics are as follows:
The village integrates with the surrounding mountainous environment, distributed concentrically along the mountain foot, with panoramic views of the rolling mountain ranges. This creates a spatial structure that interacts with the natural landscape, specifically the “mountain-facing” orientation. The surrounding farmland tightly encircles the village, forming an organic whole with the mountains and fields and emphasizing the relationship between the land and the mountains. The farmland serves as both the village’s production base and its cohesive force, providing a smooth transition between the village and the surrounding terrain. The village’s plains serve as the main production area, seamlessly connecting with the surrounding mountains.

3.4.3. Guided Pattern

The core feature of the Guided Pattern is that the ecological or productive space acts as the central framework that drives the arrangement of living spaces. This pattern is exemplified by Lianghekou Village and Laowuji Village, both of which are hydrophilic settlements of the Tujia and Miao ethnic groups. The spatial characteristics are as follows:
The villages are located in the valleys between mountain ranges, with a spatial layout that is highly integrated with the natural environment. Due to the narrowness of the valley, the villages develop linearly along the riverbank, ensuring a comfortable living environment for residents. The river provides abundant drinking water, irrigation, and other necessary water resources. The valley topography creates an open layout, offering ample space for production and daily activities. The river also creates favorable conditions for agricultural production, with alluvial plains formed by the river enabling the expansion of farmland, promoting rice cultivation, fisheries, and other diverse agricultural activities.

3.4.4. Juxtaposed Pattern

The core feature of the Juxtaposed Pattern is the parallel distribution of living, ecological, and productive spaces, where the three are spatially independent yet interact with each other, forming a functionally clear and equal spatial relationship with no obvious hierarchical distinctions. This pattern is exemplified by Qingyangba Village and Nashui Village, both of which are hydrophilic settlements of the Tujia and Miao ethnic groups. The spatial characteristics are as follows:
The village is clustered in relatively flat areas, forming a distinctive street market layout along the river. Located on a small plain where mountain streams converge, the land resources are abundant, providing fertile farmlands that support stable, high-yield agricultural activities. The main street of the village is situated on the flat river valley plain, seamlessly integrated with the natural landscape. The linear arrangement of streets and clustered buildings highlight the harmonious coexistence of humans and nature.

3.4.5. Semi-Enclosed Pattern

The core feature of the Semi-Enclosed Pattern is that the ecological or productive space partially encloses the living space, forming a “three sides enclosed, one side open” spatial arrangement. This pattern is exemplified by Widaoshui Village and Ranjia Village, both of which are sun-facing multi-ethnic settlements. The spatial characteristics are as follows:
The village is backed by dense forests and faces terraced fields, benefiting from abundant sunlight. The forests provide the villagers with wood, medicinal herbs, and other rich natural resources, while the farmland serves as the primary source of food. This ecological cycle and the sustainable use of natural resources enable the village to develop harmoniously. The architectural style perfectly integrates with the natural environment, with primary building materials such as wood, stone, and clay sourced locally, enhancing both the structural durability and regional cultural identity. To better utilize the terrain and provide safety, the village is often built on higher ground, offering an expansive view and ensuring the safety of the village.

4. Discussion

4.1. Impact of Natural Environment Factors on the Distribution of Traditional Villages

Research indicates that traditional villages in Enshi exhibit a clustered distribution pattern, forming four aggregation zones in the northern part of Laifeng County, the western part of Xuan’en County, the southeastern part of Enshi City, and the central part of Lichuan City. These zones are relatively flat, suggesting that traditional villages in Enshi are mainly located on flat micro-topographies, such as river terraces and mountain basins, which avoid geological hazards like flash floods and landslides, while facilitating irrigation for farming [37]. Moreover, the selection of village sites embodies ecological wisdom and cultural logic, with spatial distribution characteristics showing clear patterns in terms of altitude, proximity to water sources, slope, and orientation.
Regarding altitude, most villages are concentrated in mid-to-high-altitude areas above 600 m. This reflects an adaptation to vertical climate zones in mountain agricultural civilizations. This altitude range features a temperate climate, with an average annual temperature of 12–16 °C, avoiding the hot and humid pests of lower-altitude valleys, as well as the freezing hazards of higher altitudes. The soil is moderately fertile, ideal for traditional agricultural development. Furthermore, natural geographic barriers formed by altitude differences, such as Qiyue Mountain and the Qingjiang Grand Canyon, offer protection from modern urban expansion, preserving Enshi’s cultural heritage, such as Tujia stilt houses and wind-and-rain bridges [38].
In terms of distance to water sources, 81.5% of villages are within 3 km of a water system, highlighting the strong correlation between village layout and water availability, resulting in a typical “hydrophilic” characteristic. The water source layout of traditional villages follows the principle of “agriculture first,” ensuring that mountain streams meet basic farming needs while also protecting the villages from flood risks. Villages such as Pengjiazhai use a “water lane–dike–terrace” system to convert mountain streams 1.2 km away into production and domestic water sources, achieving 78% water transfer efficiency. This demonstrates the scientific nature of the traditional water system design [39]. Ancestors tended to choose locations near river networks, not only for access to water but also to support the self-sustaining agricultural model [40].
Slope features show that 63% of Enshi’s traditional villages are distributed on gentle slopes. From an engineering perspective, slopes of 10–15° are most suitable for terraced rice cultivation [41]. For example, the terraced tea fields of Wujiatai Village in Xuan’en County use a 2–3 m high embankment for each level, along with 0.5-m-wide drainage channels, reducing soil erosion by 62% compared to flatland cultivation. Slopes of 15–30° are more suitable for planting economic forest trees, such as lacquer and camellia trees. In Mao Ba Township, Lichuan City, lacquer tree planting zones are arranged along 25° slopes, yielding 35% higher per-tree output than flatland planting. Additionally, slope differences also affect the architectural form and layout of traditional villages in Enshi. On gentle slopes of 10–30°, village buildings primarily follow contour lines in a linear distribution. Tujia stilt houses, with their cantilevered, staggered structure, adapt to the terrain’s undulations, optimizing land use while minimizing damage to the original topography [42].
In terms of orientation, 71.1% of traditional villages in Enshi are oriented southeast to northwest (especially south and southwest). This is a response to the subtropical mountain climate. This orientation allows buildings to maximize sunlight exposure, reducing heating needs in winter, while using the back mountain for shading and incorporating cross-breezes in summer to mitigate the effects of heat. In areas like Qiyue Mountain and the Qingjiang Grand Canyon, villages often choose south-facing or southwest-facing “concave terrains,” which absorb more solar radiation. The concave shape creates a buffer zone for airflows, reducing the impact of winter cold winds (northeast winds) while allowing southeast winds in summer, creating a comfortable living environment [43]. This orientation also aligns with the Tujia philosophy of “sitting north, facing south,” which is considered ideal for “hiding wind and gathering qi.” It requires villages or buildings to have the “dragon vein” mountain behind them, with open space and water sources in front, creating a harmonious spatial order of “embracing the sun while keeping the shade.”

4.2. Ecological Logic and Wisdom of Different Spatial Patterns

The five PLES-PLs summarized in this study show different spatial relationships based on natural factors, yet all patterns reflect a deep adaptation to the natural environment, embodying the idea of ecological awareness that aligns with the patterns of indigenous settlements. First, in terms of village site selection, all patterns demonstrate the principle of following nature. Whether it is the terraced layout of high-altitude villages along the mountainsides, the riverfront clustering of hydrophilic villages, or the sunlight optimization of sun-facing villages, all are based on the terrain, hydrology, and microclimates. For instance, Damaopo Ying Village in the Nested Pattern avoids steep slopes prone to geological hazards by following the natural drainage of the mountain slope, similar to the strategy of Plala Village in Yunnan, which “chooses locations on gentle slopes above the water system [44].” The Guided Pattern of Laowuji Village grows linearly along the river valley, selecting higher ground for settlement, both close to water and protected from flooding, echoing the water management wisdom of Dutang Village in Zhaoqing, Guangdong, which “utilizes a pond to regulate floodwater.” This proactive avoidance of disaster risks is the foundation for village survival in harmony with nature.
Secondly, all patterns emphasize ecological awareness and respect for nature, aligning with the principles of “respecting nature, human–nature harmony, and ecological constraints.” For example, Qingyangba Village in the Juxtaposed Pattern has a parallel distribution of streets, farmland, and rivers, with each element independent yet mutually dependent. The village’s spatial form, based on the local river valley topography, Tujia-Miao culture, and agriculture–fishing economy, reflects the orderly coupling of PLES under specific natural and cultural conditions [45]. Similarly, Shemi Lake Village, in the Ring-Shaped Pattern, has the village at the center with surrounding farmland and distant mountain forests, avoiding the fragmentation of the original ecosystem [46]. This demonstrates the moderate expansion of human activity under natural constraints, achieving harmonious coexistence. This spatial collaboration, where production, living, and ecological spaces form a functional loop, sustains the development of traditional villages.
Additionally, all patterns emphasize the conscious use of nature. For example, the Nested Pattern villages develop terraced agriculture, use mountain forest resources for housing construction, and maximize land use. The Semi-Enclosed Pattern villages rely on sunlight and forest resources to create a “back-mountain, front-terrace” cultivation-living system, optimizing microclimate advantages. The Guided and Juxtaposed villages make full use of river valley plains and water resources to develop rice cultivation and fisheries, achieving “prosperity by water.” In the Ring-Shaped villages, the farmland is the core, ensuring convenient support for farming needs. These measures fully utilize natural resources and follow environmental awareness, enabling efficient land resource allocation and the healthy functioning of ecosystems, which meets both production and living needs while maintaining dynamic balance between humans and nature [47].

4.3. Protection and Utilization Strategies Based on Pattern Differences

Different spatial patterns require distinct protection strategies based on their influencing factors and applicability. For Nested Pattern villages, the focus is on maintaining the “mountain–forest–farmland–residence” ecological cycle, ensuring resource sustainability through traditional harvesting rules and terraced field restoration. For Ring-Shaped villages, the focus is on maintaining the “sacrifice–residence–agriculture–ecology” circle, using graded control measures to preserve spatial compactness and ecological gradient. Guided villages, with rivers as the spatial backbone, emphasize water system restoration and the establishment of ecological buffer zones, strengthening the “water–village–farm” interdependence. Juxtaposed villages focus on the parallel coordination of living, production, and ecological spaces, connecting functional zones via corridors for resource flow. Semi-Enclosed villages strike a balance between the three-sided ecological defense and the open spatial vitality, seeking equilibrium in forest protection and farmland landscape transformation. These differentiated strategies based on spatial patterns preserve the historical logic of human-nature interaction in villages and provide feasible pathways for contemporary active conservation.

5. Conclusions

This study innovatively establishes a research path that integrates “spatial distribution characteristics–pattern language identification–protection strategy formulation.” From the perspective of pattern language, it explores the PLES relationships of traditional villages, delves into the intrinsic factors that shape them, and identifies several distinct spatial patterns. Based on these patterns, the study proposes corresponding protection and utilization strategies, thus laying the foundation for categorized protection approaches. Our key contributions are as follows:
(1)
Spatial Distribution of Traditional Villages: At a macro level, traditional villages in Enshi Prefecture exhibit a clustered distribution, primarily concentrated in the central and southwestern regions, forming four main clusters in the northern part of Laifeng County, the western part of Xuan’en County, the southeastern part of Enshi City, and the central part of Lichuan City. However, at the county or city level, the distribution is uneven.
(2)
Categorization of Traditional Villages: Based on the influencing factors of spatial distribution, traditional villages in Enshi can be classified into four typical types: mid-to-high-altitude villages, hydrophilic villages, flatland villages, and sun-facing villages. Villages tend to be located at mid-to-high altitudes due to the mild climate and fertile soil, near water sources to support agricultural needs and ecological sustainability, on gentle slopes conducive to terraced farming and efficient land use, and oriented towards the north to optimize sunlight exposure and follow traditional feng shui principles.
(3)
Identification of Five Pattern Languages: By selecting ten representative traditional villages under five different natural background elements, this study compares and analyzes the value of PLES elements, the layout of planar and cross-sectional spaces, the ratio of elements, and organizational patterns. This analysis identifies five distinct pattern languages: Nested Pattern, Ring-Shaped Pattern, Guided Pattern, Juxtaposed Pattern, and Semi-Enclosed Pattern. Each pattern corresponds to specific natural environmental factors and types of traditional villages, revealing the close relationship and interaction between traditional villages and their natural environment, and reflecting shared ecological logic and wisdom.
Compared to existing studies primarily limited to descriptive analyses of spatial distribution and planar morphology in traditional villages, the pattern language approach more effectively elucidates the underlying logic of PLES embedded within spatial configurations. The application of pattern language facilitates not only the deconstruction of explicit compositional features within PLES, but also the articulation of their intrinsic generative mechanisms from a human–land relationship perspective. These findings establish a transferable theoretical framework for deciphering the organizational patterns of PLES, while providing differentiated development strategies for conserving and revitalizing diverse traditional village typologies.
Additionally, due to the large number of traditional villages in Enshi, the study selected only a limited number of villages for analysis. Future research should consider expanding the sample size for further discussion.
Nevertheless, by applying the pattern language method to study the PLES of traditional villages and analyzing the intrinsic relationships between the elements, this research identifies characteristic spatial patterns. This approach is not only applicable to other studies on traditional villages but also provides a more comprehensive perspective for understanding the internal evolutionary mechanisms and external formation logic of traditional villages in Enshi. Furthermore, the study suggests that under similar geographic conditions and environmental characteristics, rural areas in different regions tend to form distinct PLES-PL. This finding offers valuable insights for domestic research on traditional villages and provides useful references for rural conservation and utilization efforts in other countries and regions.

Author Contributions

Methodology, Y.Z., T.C., Z.L. and Y.S.; Software, T.C.; Validation, T.C.; Resources, Y.Z. and Y.S.; Data curation, T.C., Z.L. and Y.S.; Writing—original draft, T.C. and Z.L.; Writing—review & editing, Y.Z. and Y.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China [grant number: 52178054], Provincial Key Research and Development Program of Hubei [grant number: 2020BAB119], and The National Social Science Fund of China [grant number: 19BSH097].

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Du, X.; Li, Q.X. A New Method for the Classification of Traditional Villages and the Formulation of Conservation and Development Strategies: A Case Study of Four Traditional Villages in Linhai City, Zhejiang Province. Archit. Herit. 2020, 2, 42–52. [Google Scholar]
  2. Woods, M. Rural Geography: Processes, Responses and Experiences in Rural Restructuring; Sage Publications: London, UK, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  3. Chen, G.; Yan, J.; Wang, C.; Chen, S. Expanding the Associations between Landscape Characteristics and Aesthetic Sensory Perception for Traditional Village Public Space. Forests 2024, 15, 97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Halfacree, K. Rural space: Constructing a three-fold architecture. In Handbook of Rural Studies; Cloke, P.J., Mooney, P., Marsden, T., Eds.; SAGE: London, UK, 2006; pp. 44–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Wilson, G.A. From productivism to post-productivism…and back again? Exploring the (un) changed natural and mental landscapes of European agriculture. Trans. Inst. Br. Geogr. 2001, 26, 77–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Galani-Moutafi, V. Rural space (re)produced—Practices, Performances and Visions: A Case Study from an Aegean Island. J. Rural Stud. 2013, 32, 103–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Mackrell, P.; Pemberton, S. New representations of rural space: Eastern European migrants and the denial of poverty and deprivation in the English countryside. J. Rural Stud. 2018, 59, 49–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Bański, J.; Wesołowska, M. Transformations in housing construction in rural areas of Poland’s Lublin region: Influence on the spatial settlement structure and landscape aesthetics. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2010, 94, 116–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Reid, J.-A.; Green, B. Regenerating rural social space? Teacher education for rural–regional. Aust. J. Educ. 2025, 54, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Elbakidze, M.; Angelstam, P.; Yamelynets, T.; Dawson, L.; Gebrehiwot, M.; Stryamets, N.; Johansson, K.-E.; Garrido, P.; Naumov, V.; Manton, M. A bottom-up approach to map land covers as potential green infrastructure hubs for human well-being in rural settings: A case study from Sweden. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2017, 168, 72–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Antrop, M. Landscape Change and the Urbanization Process in Europe. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2016, 154, 38–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Hall, C.M.; Lew, A.A.; Williams, A.M. Understanding and Managing Tourism Impacts: An Integrated Approach; Routledge: Oxfordshire, UK, 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Fu, Y.; Timothy, D.J. Evaluating cultural-tourism integration in rural destinations: A framework based on resident perceptions. Tour. Manag. Perspect. 2021, 39, 100802. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Meyfroidt, P.; Lambin, E.F. Global Forest Transition: Prospects for an End to Deforestation. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 2011, 36, 343–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Fairhead, J.; Leach, M.; Scoones, I. Green grabbing: A new appropriation of nature? J. Peasant Stud. 2012, 39, 237–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Barrios, S.; Bertinelli, L.; Strobl, E. Climatic Change and Rural-Urban Migration: The Case of Sub-Saharan Africa. J. Urban Econ. 2006, 60, 357–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Kabir, G.; Koellner, T. A Review of Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA) Frameworks for Bioenergy. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 60, 1418–1428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Almagro, M.; Hernández, J. Spatial Analysis of Rural Heritage in Spain: A GIS Approach. J. Cult. Herit. 2018, 33, 200–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Voltaire, L.; Lévi, L.; Alban, F.; Boncoeur, J. Valuing cultural world heritage sites: An application of the travel cost method to Mont-Saint-Michel. J. Cult. Econ. 2017, 41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Ansell, C.; Gash, A. Collaborative governance in theory and practice. J. Public Adm. Res. Theory 2008, 18, 543–571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Zhang, Y.; Li, Y. Spatial Evolution and Spatial Production of Traditional Villages from “Backward Poverty Villages” to “Ecologically Well-Off Villages”: Experiences from the Hinterland of National Nature Reserves in China. J. Mt. Sci. 2024, 21, 1100–1118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Hillier, B.; Hanson, J. The Social Logic of Space; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. O’Sullivan, D.; Unwin, D.J. Geographic Information Analysis; Wiley-Blackwell: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Verburg, P.H.; Crossman, N.; Ellis, E.C.; Heinimann, A.; Hostert, P. Land system science and sustainable development of the earth system: A global perspective. Anthropocene 2015, 12, 29–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Campiani, A.; Lingle, A.M.; Lercari, N. Spatial analysis and heritage conservation: Leveraging 3-D data and GIS for monitoring earthen architecture. J. Cult. Herit. 2019, 39, 166–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Folke, C. Resilience: The emergence of a perspective for social—Ecological systems analyses. Glob. Environ. Change 2006, 16, 253–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Batty, M. The New Science of Cities; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Bille, M.; Sørensen, T.F. (Eds.) Elements of Architecture: Assembling Archaeology, Atmosphere and the Performance of Building Spaces; Routledge: London, UK, 2016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. He, R.W.; Guo, S.L.; Deng, X.; Zhou, K. Influence of Social Capital on the Livelihood Strategies of Farmers Under China’s Rural Revitalization Strategy in Poor Mountain Areas: A Case Study of the Liangshan Yi Autonomous Prefecture. J. Mt. Sci. 2022, 19, 958–973. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Neef, A.; Heidhues, F.; Stahr, K.; Sruamsiri, P. Participatory and Integrated Research in Mountainous Regions of Thailand and Vietnam: Approaches and Lessons Learned. J. Mt. Sci. 2006, 4, 305–324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Alexander, C. A Pattern Language; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 1977. [Google Scholar]
  32. de Vreede, G.K.G.-J.; Kolfschoten, G.L. A Design Approach for Collaboration Processes: A Multimethod Design Science Study in Collaboration Engineering. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 2009, 26, 225–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Chong, F.; Dong, Y.; Shi, X.; Sun, S.; He, D.; Hui, B.; Zang, R.; Zhang, B.; Zuo, Z.; Xiao, J. Terrace sequence along the Yellow River of the Xinghai section in the northeastern Tibetan Plateau: Implications for evolution of the upper Yellow River since the Pliocene. J. Earth Sci. 2025, 1–65. [Google Scholar]
  34. Jia, W.; Wang, L. Morphological typology pedigree of centripetal spatial schema in traditional Chinese settlements. Front. Archit. Res. 2024, 13, 1198–1214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Duan, L.; Xu, W.; Zheng, Z. An Empirical Study on the Effectiveness of Improving Farmers’ Digital Skills and Rural E-Commerce in Promoting Farmers’ Income Growth. Contemp. Soc. Sci. 2025, 10, 66–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Lin, S.; Wang, P.; Zhu, P.; Huang, K.; Lu, R. Regional differences and formation mechanisms of watershed territorial space patterns evolution: A case study of the critical areas in the Pearl River Basin. J. Geogr. Sci. 2025, 35, 941–963. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Chen, M.; Guo, H.Y.; Chen, R. Study on Disaster Prevention Adaptability of Traditional Villages in Enshi Prefecture—A Case Study of Pengjiazhai in Xuan’en County. Huazhong Archit. 2021, 39, 141–145. [Google Scholar]
  38. Xie, K. Study on Spatial Morphology Distribution and Protection of Traditional Villages in Enshi Prefecture; Wuhan Institute of Technology: Wuhan, China, 2023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Fang, Z.D.; Zhang, Z. Preliminary Study on Layout and Farmland Landscape of Traditional Tujia Villages in Enshi Prefecture. Acta Agric. Jiangxi 2013, 25, 33–35+42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Fu, X.L. Cognitive research on spatial morphology of traditional villages based on ecological perspective. Fresenius Environ. Bull. 2021, 30, 2285–2289. [Google Scholar]
  41. Yuan, X.P.; Yu, S.F. Optimization of Rural Tea Culture Experience Space from the Perspective of Landscape Perception Ecology—A Case Study of WujiaTai in Xuan’en County. Des. Res. 2022, 12, 84–90. [Google Scholar]
  42. Duan, Y.P.; Lai, Z.L.; Guo, Y.Z.; Zhang, L. A Comparative Study of Rock Houses and Stilted Buildings in Wuling Mountain Area of Southwest Hubei from a Regional Perspective. Zhuangshi 2022, 1, 130–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Wu, W.; Liu, Y.; Wang, H.Y. Study on Spatial Distribution and Influencing Factors of Traditional Villages in Western Hubei; Chinese & Overseas Architecture: Beijing, China, 2025; pp. 1–9. [Google Scholar]
  44. Wang, Y.N. Analysis on Spatial Morphological Characteristics of Traditional Buyi Villages—A Case Study of Lazhe Village in Luoping, Yunnan. J. Green Sci. Technol. 2018, 15, 12–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Wang, H.B. Study on Protection and Inheritance of Spatial Pedigree of Traditional Villages in Jiangsu Province; Southeast University: Nanjing, China, 2023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Yue, W.Z. Harmonious Coexistence between Man and Nature: A Distinctive Feature of Chinese-Style Modernization. Natl. Gov. 2023, 15, 2–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Bourque, K.; Schiller, A.; Loyola Angosto, C.; McPhail, L.; Bagnasco, W.; Ayres, A.; Larsen, A. Balancing agricultural production, groundwater management, and biodiversity goals: A multi-benefit optimization model of agriculture in Kern County, California. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 670, 865–875. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Land 14 01624 g001
Figure 1. Spatial distribution of traditional villages in Enshi Prefecture.
Figure 1. Spatial distribution of traditional villages in Enshi Prefecture.
Land 14 01624 g001
Land 14 01624 g002
Figure 2. Technical route.
Figure 2. Technical route.
Land 14 01624 g002
Land 14 01624 g003
Figure 3. Kernel density analysis of traditional village distribution in Enshi Prefecture.
Figure 3. Kernel density analysis of traditional village distribution in Enshi Prefecture.
Land 14 01624 g003
Land 14 01624 g004
Figure 4. Analysis of influencing factors.
Figure 4. Analysis of influencing factors.
Land 14 01624 g004
Land 14 01624 g005
Figure 5. General layout of representative traditional villages.
Figure 5. General layout of representative traditional villages.
Land 14 01624 g005
Land 14 01624 g006
Figure 6. Analysis of organizational patterns of elements in traditional villages.
Figure 6. Analysis of organizational patterns of elements in traditional villages.
Land 14 01624 g006
Land 14 01624 g007
Figure 7. Types of language patterns for “Production-Living-Ecology” spaces in traditional villages of Enshi.
Figure 7. Types of language patterns for “Production-Living-Ecology” spaces in traditional villages of Enshi.
Land 14 01624 g007
Table 1. Classification of traditional villages in Enshi Prefecture.
Table 1. Classification of traditional villages in Enshi Prefecture.
Classification of Traditional VillagesTraditional Villages
Mid-to-high villagesLiangxihe, Rentou Mountain, Majiagou, Jinlongba, Xintian, Dawajing, Sanjiatai Mongolian, Zhongling, Gunlongba, Matougou, Dawaxi, Tianluoshui, Xiongdong, Jinlong, Xiangyang, Cheliaoba, Hexin, Damapo Camp, Haiyang, Meiping, Wuyang, Longjiajie, Wuli, Shuangmiao, Taiping, Shuitianba, Huangbai, Tongma, Zhuangfangba
Riverside villagesTielu, Xinglongao, Guanyinping, Yutang, Tianjiazhai, Lengshuixi, Yumu, Baiguo, Tangya Temple, Yaopu, Zhongzhaidam, Lianghekou, Jinlongping, Luodou, Shibian, Yejiaoyuan, Erguanzhai, Dushitang, Guanba, Meizi’a, Changgan, Heidongtang, Shanshen, Toutuancha, Jiantianba, Qingyangba, Niudongping, Qingshitang, Dasiba, Laowuji, Niu lanjie, Nashe
Flatland villagesShemilu, Zhanggaozhai, Hukou, Shiqiao, Chuanxinyan, Dajichang, Shepanxi, Gujiasan, Liming, Chedonghu, Daxi
Sun-facing villagesZhongdawan, Laishuyuan, Shuanglong, Zhongcunba, Longshui, Xixiang, Wudaoshui, Zhangjiajie, Ranjia, Xin’an, Chenzi Mountain, Xinchang, Ping Shan, Tianjiaba, Banshajie, Baigu, Malixi, Luomadong, Gaoyangtai, Anle Tun
Table 2. Typical traditional villages in Enshi Prefecture and their characteristics.
Table 2. Typical traditional villages in Enshi Prefecture and their characteristics.
Typical Traditional VillagesCurrent CharacteristicsRepresentative Villages
Mid-to-high villagesAltitude above 600 mDamapo Camp, Dawajing
Hydrophilic villagesWithin 3 km of waterLianghekou, Nashui, Laowuji, Qingyangba
Flatland villagesSlope between 10° and 30°Shemilu, Zhanggaozhai
Sun-facing villagesMain aspects are West and SouthRanjia, Wudaoshui
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Zhang, Y.; Cai, T.; Liu, Z.; Shu, Y. Construction of Production-Living-Ecological Space Pattern Languages for Traditional Villages in Enshi Prefecture Based on Spatial Distribution Characteristics. Land 2025, 14, 1624. https://doi.org/10.3390/land14081624

AMA Style

Zhang Y, Cai T, Liu Z, Shu Y. Construction of Production-Living-Ecological Space Pattern Languages for Traditional Villages in Enshi Prefecture Based on Spatial Distribution Characteristics. Land. 2025; 14(8):1624. https://doi.org/10.3390/land14081624

Chicago/Turabian Style

Zhang, Yawei, Teng Cai, Zhiying Liu, and Yang Shu. 2025. "Construction of Production-Living-Ecological Space Pattern Languages for Traditional Villages in Enshi Prefecture Based on Spatial Distribution Characteristics" Land 14, no. 8: 1624. https://doi.org/10.3390/land14081624

APA Style

Zhang, Y., Cai, T., Liu, Z., & Shu, Y. (2025). Construction of Production-Living-Ecological Space Pattern Languages for Traditional Villages in Enshi Prefecture Based on Spatial Distribution Characteristics. Land, 14(8), 1624. https://doi.org/10.3390/land14081624

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop